Another leaked component photo shows an LCD panel manufactured by Sharp that is claimed to be a 9.7-inch Retina Display for Apple's anticipated third-generation iPad.

The pictured component, highlighted by the Japanese-language site Macotakara, clearly shows on the connector that it is manufactured by Sharp. But the site also claims it is a QXGA 9.7-inch display that "seems to be for the next iPad."

The display has three flat cables that connect to the base of the LCD, which is said to sport a high-resolution 2,048-by-1,536-pixel display. That's the same size that has been rumored for an Apple-branded Retina Display on the third-generation iPad.

The resolution suggests that Apple's so-called "iPad 3" will not match the 326 pixel-per-inch density of the iPhone 4S, iPhone 4 and iPod touch. Rather, the rumored resolution would be a pixel density of around 260 pixels-per-inch, with quadruple the resolution found on the current iPad.

Currently, the iPad 2 and first-generation iPad have a resolution of 1,024-by-768 pixels, which has a density of 132 pixels-per-inch. That falls well short of Apple's "Retina Display" distinction, named so because the individual pixels are so small that they are all but impossible for the human eye to discern.

The purported iPad 3 LCD is the latest in a flurry of components claimed to show off parts from Apple's third-generation iPad. It comes on the heels of a photo claiming to show the back cover of the next-generation device, as well as another one that showed the inside of the back panel, suggesting the device will sport a larger battery.

The photos of the back panel suggest that the device will be nearly identical in form factor to the current iPad 2. But inside, the part shows signs that the LCD display, camera, and logic board have been redesigned, in addition to the prospect of a larger battery.

"...a pixel density of around 260 pixels-per-inch, quadrupling the density found on the current iPad."

That's not quadrupling, it's doubling the density. Just because you double pixel dimensions doesn't mean you quadruple density. If density was quadrupled, that would have meant the iPad had a crappy 65dpi, which it doesn't.

Well, I was hoping for an edge-to-edge display in a bezelless and buttonless design, with the virtual bezel switchable on and off, and the home button replaced with gestures. Would be cool for board games and other apps benefiting from max real estate.

My 20 month old toddler keeps accidentally clicking on a home button when she solves puzzles so the home button going away would be nice as well.

If both LCD and back panel have the same form factor then it won't happen this time and perhaps never.

Currently, the iPad 2 and first-generation iPad have a resolution of 1,024-by-768 pixels, which has a density of 132 pixels-per-inch. That falls well short of Apple's "Retina Display" distinction, named so because the individual pixels are so small that they are all but impossible for the human eye to discern.

It was my understanding that there's a distance issue involved as well. The closer someone is likely to hold the device to their face the smaller the pixels have to be, but at a distance they can be slightly larger and the eye still can't pick one from another unless the viewer is some kind of mutant with super vision

And your toddler (and YOU and everyone else) will keep accidentally quitting apps, switching apps, performing commands, and what have you if there's no bezel.

My guess is that Apple has explored designs with a variety of bezel widths, including ones where the bezel is close to zero width.

It seems necessary to have one - but the smaller the better, within the limits of ergonomics. I would think that Apple likes the current choice, because so amny other choices have already been tried and rejected.

My guess is that Apple has explored designs with a variety of bezel widths, including ones where the bezel is close to zero width.

It seems necessary to have one - but the smaller the better, within the limits of ergonomics. I would think that Apple likes the current choice, because so amny other choices have already been tried and rejected.

Virtual bezel is a solution. Not only it could be turned off, it can be also adjusted to comfortable thickness depending on user's thumb size.